HAL Id: hal-01768073
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01768073
Submitted on 16 Apr 2018
HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- entific research documents, whether they are pub- lished or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers.
L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.
Time and Materiality: What is at Stake in the
Materialization of Time and Time as a Materialization?
François-Xavier de Vaujany, Nathalie Mitev, Pierre Laniray, Emmanuelle Vaast
To cite this version:
François-Xavier de Vaujany, Nathalie Mitev, Pierre Laniray, Emmanuelle Vaast. Time and Materiality:
What is at Stake in the Materialization of Time and Time as a Materialization? . François-Xavier de Vaujany, Nathalie Mitev, Pierre Laniray, Emmanuelle Vaast. Materiality and time. Historical Perspectives on Organizations, Artefacts and Practices, Palgrave, pp.1-13, 2014, 978-1-137-43212-4.
�hal-01768073�
1
Time and Materiality:
What is at Stake in the Materialization of Time and Time as a Materialization?
François-Xavier de Vaujany Nathalie Mitev
Pierre Laniray Emmanuelle Vaast
This edited book concentrates on the materiality of artefacts, practices and organizations, and on their historical dimension. It combines recent scholarly interest on sociomateriality with a deep fascination with time and a temporal perspective. It adds a time dimension that complements the spatial focus of a first book on ‘Materiality and Space’ published by Palgrave Macmillan in 2013.
The stream of research related to sociomaterial practices is influenced primarily by Latour (2005), Suchman (1987), Pickering (1995) and Orlikowski (2005, 2007) and has attempted to overcome the dichotomy between social and material worlds by concentrating on practices within organizations. These practices are constituted by, but also produce, material and social dynamics. This movement is currently having an important impact in the field of management and organization studies.
This second book is based on the 3rd Organizations, Artefacts and Practices workshop1 that took place at the London School of Economics in June 2013 organized jointly by the Information Systems and Innovation Group in the Department of Management, the Department of Accounting, and Paris Dauphine University. The workshop encompassed themes related to:
Historical perspectives on materiality; Historiographies, data and materiality; Social and material entanglements across time; Information technology, information and materiality in organizations; Measuring and accounting for time in organizations; Space and time in organizations; Theoretical and methodological perspectives on time in organizations; Identity and materiality in organizations; Accounting, time and materiality; Institutions, institutionalization and materiality in organizations; Critical perspectives on time and materiality; Artefacts, organizations and time. The event gathered 120 participants from the
1 For more information: http://workshopoap.dauphine.fr/fr.html
2
UK, Europe, the US and elsewhere, to present and discuss 42 papers. Track chairs and the workshop organizers selected the best papers. Additionally, two keynote speakers have provided a chapter, and two senior figures who attended the workshop have offered a preface and a postface.
There are many books on materiality in social sciences, going back to Arjun Appadurai (1986)’s “The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective” that examines how things are sold and traded in a variety of social and cultural settings and bridges the disciplines of social history, cultural anthropology, and economics. Another example in social anthropology is Daniel Miller (2005)’s “Materiality (Politics, History, and Culture)” that explores the expression of the immaterial through material forms and aims to de-centre the social to make room for the material. More recent examples drawing on cultural anthropology are Tilley, Keane, Kuchler, Rowlands and Spyer (2013)’s Handbook of Material Culture. It is concerned with the relationship between persons and things in the past and in the present, in urban, industrialized and small-scale societies across the globe. Harvey, Casella, Evans, Knox, McLean, Silva, Thobur, and Woodward (2013)’s Objects and Materials focuses on object- mediated relations and investigates the capacity of objects to shape, unsettle and fashion social worlds.
Time, Consumption and Everyday Life: Practice, Materiality and Culture edited by Elizabeth Shove, Frank Trentmann and Richard Wilk in 2009, focuses on the changing rhythms and temporal organization of everyday life and this relates to our proposal more closely, particularly its time dimension. The book brings together experts from management, sociology, history, anthropology and philosophy to follow routines and rhythms, their emotional and political dynamics, and show how they are anchored in material culture and everyday practice. Studying practice, temporality and material culture together opens up new intellectual agendas and resonates with our approach, although our proposed book specifically focuses on organizations and management, rather than everyday life and consumption.
The social study of science and technology has also studied materiality for some time, for instance in Chasing Technoscience: Matrix for Materiality by Evan Selinger, Donna Haraway, Don Ihde, Bruno Latour and Andrew Pickering (2003). It aimed to rectify the lack of consideration of the material dimension by philosophers, sociologists, and anthropologists, in
3
the practices of the sciences. Indeed, Andrew Pickering was a contributor to our previous book on Materiality and Space.
A concern with materiality has slowly migrated from the social sciences to management and organization studies. One seminal contribution in this regard has been Pratt and Rafaeli’s (2006) book Artifacts and Organizations. Since then the following were published within the last year clearly showing a growing interest in this theme from different angles. How Matter Matters: Objects, Artifacts, and Materiality in Organization Studies is edited by Paul Carlile, Davide Nicolini, Ann Langley, and Haridimos Tsoukas (2013). It is rooted in process studies and aims to better understand sociomateriality and organizing and explore the sociomaterial dimensions of organizational life. Daniel Robichaud and François Cooren edited Organization and Organizing: Materiality, Agency and Discourse (2013). The strength of this volume is combining organizational communication theory, organizing and organization to conceptualize materiality, agency, and discourse. Similarly, Jeremy Packer and Stephen Crofts edited Communication Matters: Materialist Approaches to Media, Mobility and Networks (2013), that aims to rethink communication as material and situates materialist approaches to communication within the broader "materiality turn" emerging in the humanities and social sciences. Perhaps the book closest to ours is “Materiality and Organizing: Social Interaction in a Technological World” edited by Paul Leonardi, Bonnie Nardi and Jannis Kallinikos in 2013.
This book focuses on materiality and sociomateriality in the study of technology and is situated at the junction of technology and social practice. By contrast, our book focuses on the complex relationship between materiality and time in organizations.
With a key focus on time and longue durée, business history studies have long populated the management research landscape, see for example The Oxford Handbook of Business History (Oxford Handbooks in Business and Management) by Geoffrey Jones and Jonathan Zeitlin (2009). Business historians study the historical evolution of business systems, entrepreneurs and firms, as well as their interaction with their political, economic, and social environment. A classic example can be Inventing the Electronic Century (Harvard Studies in Business History) by Alfred Chandler (2005) that traces the origins and worldwide development of consumer electronics and computer technology companies.
Organizational and management history is a more recent movement in management studies that draws on philosophical and sociological conceptualizations of time, such as George Herbert
4
Mead (The Philosophy of the Present, 1932)’s seminal work on the structure of temporality and consciousness and the character of both the present and the past. Scholars in this vein include Hayden White (Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation, 1987) who examines the production, distribution and consumption of meaning in different historical epochs; Alex Callinicos (Theories and Narratives: Reflections on the Philosophy of History, 1995)’s exploration of the relationships between social theory and historical writing; or David Carr (Time, Narrative, and History, 1991)’s work on narrative configurations of everyday life and their practical and social character. Another example is Robert Hassan and Ronald Purser’s edited book on 24/7: Time and Temporality in the Network Society (2007). They examine how the regimes firstly of the clock and then of the networked society have changed individuals and organizations.
Adding a time perspective has benefited other disciplines, in particular, anthropology, as illustrated in Time and the Other: how Anthropology makes its Object, by Johannes Fabian (1983). This classic study changed the way anthropologists relate to the “here and now” and the “there and then” of their objects of study. Researchers in management and organizational history have started bringing similar changes to organization studies; however they tend to publish in academic journals and this new field has not fully integrated the importance of the material into its remit. Our book therefore endeavors to bring together these various strands of existing research together into a unique outlook on organizations, materiality and time.
The relationship between time and the materiality of everyday practices is by itself an old and well-trodden theme in the analysis of societies and organizations. Among the founding fathers of social sciences, Karl Marx, through what he called ‘historical materialism’ (see Marx, Engels and Lenin, 1974 or Giddens, 19852), considered that the History of our societies and their material underpinnings should be the key focus of social studies. Unsurprisingly, to develop an alternative post-marxist vision of societies and their structuration, Giddens (1984, 1985) has also reconceptualized the relationship between the materiality of our societies (e.g.
2According to Giddens (1985; 2) “Historical materialism connects the emergence of both traditional and modern states with the development of material production (or what I call “allocative resources”). But equally significant, and very often the main means whereby such material wealth is generated, is the collection and storage of information, used to coordinate subject populations.”
5
facilities and rules) and human agency to think about their constitution in the context of different spatio-temporal dynamics.
From a more methodological perspective, some social sciences, in particular History, have considered that analyzing traces of materiality provides strong hints of past times and historical contexts. Thus, exploring the way time is materialized (whether to ‘show’ the time it is or the broader historical time) is a key issue in the analysis of societies and organizations (Giddens, 1985; Le Goff, 1960; Bluedorn and Denhardt, 1988). In his illustrious research on mechanical clocks, medievalist Jacques Le Goff has shown the social and symbolic dimensions of the materialization of time. According to Le Goff (1960, 20113), the invention of the mechanical clock between the 13th and 15th century is a defining event of the Middle Ages. Two different times, and two related materializations were then in opposition with each other: that of the country (rang by Church bells) and that of towns (rang by mechanical clocks). From this point and this new accountability of time, societies and organizations experienced major changes.
Employees’ labor and wages began to be counted in hours. People realized what was at stake (e.g., their autonomy, the visibility of their work) and in some cases revolted against the use of mechanical clocks (perceived as a control tool) and went on strike (e.g. in the context of vineyards in Burgundy in the 14th century)4.
Time and its relationship with organizational materiality have also been a key focus in management and organization studies, in particular for the exploration of organizational change (Bluedorn and Denhardt, 1988; Lee and Liebenau, 1999; Goodman et al, 2001; Ancona et al, 2001; Child and Kieser, 1981). Time can be seen as a grid or scheme to make sense of organizations and their dynamics (see e.g. Child and Kieser, 1981). It is then an abstraction required to making sense of movement and organizational change. Since the late 1990s, time
3 See also Dohrn-van Rossum (1997) on this issue.
4 Le Goff (2011) even sees in mechanical clocks a more important invention than printing techniques: “JL: I think that the mechanical clock has been much more important than printing. The former has had immediate consequences on everyday life, which has not been the case of the latter. Firstly, because many works had been disseminated through the form of manuscripts for a long period. Then, because what was printed, let’s say till the mid-16th century, most books were Bibles or religious books: their diffusion targets an elite and is not at all a breakthrough for everyday life. That is why I see the mechanical clock as a major invention in the History of Mankind.”
6
has also been conceptualized as something which needs to be performed or materialized in organizations (Ancona et al, 2001; Orlikowski and Yates, 2002). Time does not appear any more as an ontological construct, exterior to collective action and organizational dynamics. It is no longer a ‘variable’. As a materialization, or performance, it is organization and its dynamics. Paradoxically, time (often thought as abstract only) has or can have a ‘matter’ for organizational stakeholders (see Bergson, 2001, on the issue of “duration”). It also becomes a key strategic stake. For instance, the schedule, planning and temporal orientation of projects are seen as a matter of control and power in organizations (Gersick, 1988, 1989). For some researchers, this possible plurality of time and its materialization introduces the possibility of conflicts of temporalities, what Norbert Alter (2000) calls “organizational dyschronies”.
Management historians have also influenced organization research by adopting longer-term perspectives related to societies and their material dynamics inspired by Braudel’s “longue durée” (Kieser, 1989, 1994; Usdiken and Kieser, 2004; Mitev and de Vaujany, 2012). Usdiken and Kieser (2004) distinguished three possible approaches for the incorporation of History and longue durée in management and organization studies:
- Supplementarist approach, where the historical “context” is simply added and is only a complement to common positivist approaches still focusing on variables, although with a longer time span than usual. It “adheres to the view of organization theory as social scientistic and merely adds History as another contextual variable, alongside other variables such as national cultures” (Booth and Rowlinson, 2006: 8);
- Integrationism, or a full consideration of History with new or stronger links between organization theory and history. The aim is “to enrich organization theory by developing links with the humanities, including history, literary theory and philosophy, without completely abandoning a social scientistic orientation” (Ibid: 8);
- Reorientationist or post-positivist approach, that examines and repositions dominant discourses including our own (such as progress or efficiency), and produces a critique and renewal of organization theory itself, on the basis of history. This “involves a thoroughgoing critique of existing theories of organization for their ahistorical orientation” (Ibid: 8).
7
Both integrationism and re-orientationism have interesting implications for the study of materiality and materialization in organizations. They imply a more subjective investigation of time, for example on the nature of collective representations of people in the past, and their evolution. They also imply a deeper understanding of materiality and materialization. Studying the institutional evolution of an organization implies long time spans and it is shown more clearly through the inclusion and comparison of material traces of past actions. Materiality and the matter of organizational and collective actions, i.e. the organizational space and its specificity, appear more clearly from a longue durée perspective (see de Vaujany and Vaast, 2013).
In the context of this edited book, we propose a re-orientationist stance on three key topics related to time and materiality. We first need (Part I) to understand how time is materialized and performed in organizations, i.e. how IT artefacts, standards and material space perform time and temporal dynamics in organizations (ontological vision of time). This is necessary (Part II) to then explore how organizations and organizational members are constituted by and constitutive of material artifacts (subjective and sociomaterial visions of time).; this leads us (Part III) to finally reflect on what a historical perspective on these materializations can bring to the study of organizations (historical – longue durée – vision of time).
- Topic I: how is everyday time materialized and performed in organizations? What is at stake in its materialization through time schedules, time-oriented managerial techniques, vestiges, enactment of old artefacts, etc.? This topic will be the concern of the first three chapters of our book;
- Topic II: how are organizations and organizational members constituted through time by material artefacts? In turn, how are material traces of past actions used and incorporated into present dynamics? How are material and social dimensions (e.g. at the level of agency) imbricated through time? Chapters 4, 5 and 6 will deal with these issues.
- Topic III: how can we make sense specifically of longue durée (in terms of organizational and societal histories), long term processes, and their materialization in organizations? This third focus will be at the core of chapters 7, 8, 9 and 10.
Our book will be organized according to these three topics in management and organization studies as is shown below.
8
Figure 1: Logical structure of the book.
Part II: Time and the materialization of
organizations
Part III: Longue durée and materiality in
organizations Part I: The
materialization of time in organizations
9
Part I. Materializing time and history in organizations: what is at stake?
In Chapter 1 (“Time, History, and Materiality”) JoAnne Yates, suggests that a discussion about time, history, and materiality brings together three themes that have been central to her research, both historical and contemporary. Throughout her career, she has studied change, whether over short (a couple of months) or long (e.g. 150 years) periods of time. Much of her work is explicitly historical and addresses long stretches of time with a historical eye. It has also been mindful of the material implications of information and communication technologies. In this chapter she explains her vision of the relationship between time, longue durée and materiality, in particular in the context of the history of voluntary consensus standard setting activities.
Using examples related to standardization, she illustrates her three themes and speculates about their implications, both individually and as they interact with each other.
In Chapter 2 (“Iconography, materiality and legitimation practices: A tale of the former NATO command room”), François-Xavier de Vaujany and Emmanuelle Vaast suggest that organizing is highly iconographical and related to historical symbolic imageries. Their chapter draws on Baschet (2008)’s historical distinction between “object-images” and “screen-images”, originally applied to the religious iconography of the Middle Ages, and argues for their relevance and critical significance in organizations’ legitimation practices. By means of an ethnographic case study of a former NATO command room repurposed as a meeting room by a French university, the authors reveal how these two iconographies co-exist and interrelate in legitimation practices. Various historical periods (NATO, post-May 68 or the more recent
‘corporate’ momentum) are frequently reenacted and performed during meetings in front of external stakeholders to guide their interpretations of events and space. Materializing the past therefore contributes to legitimating organizational activities. The authors also reveal the extent to which the relationships between these iconographies (which rely on different foundations in terms of materiality and visibility) legitimate the organization in complementary ways.
In Chapter 3 (“Evolution of non-technical standards: The case of Fair Trade”), Nadine Arnold suggests examining non-technical standards as artefacts that evolve in accordance with their contextual and historical setting. In the past, organization scholars studying standards and standardization tended to ignore material aspects of the phenomenon. An analysis of the Fair Trade standardization system shows how its underlying rules changed from guiding criteria to
10
escalating standards. Taking an evolutionary perspective Arnold outlines four major trends in the written standards and relates them to the history of Fair Trade. Detected modifications were either meant to legitimate the standardization system through the content of standards or to enable legitimate standardization practices. Overall the exuberant growth of non-technical standards leads to critical reflections on the future development of Fair Trade and its standards.
Part II. Temporal dynamics of artifacts and materiality in organizations: the importance of material traces
In Chapter 4 (“Making Organizational Facts, Standards and Routines: Tracing materialities and materializing traces”), Chris McLean discusses how we can become sensitive to the many different connections and traces of action that emerge and engage with other actions. She studies how these intensive forces become foregrounded while others may appear to fade away.
In contrast to a process of linearity and continuity where traces exist ‘out there’ in some simple cause and effect form, the cauldron of becoming is an entangled mesh of complex foldings, relations and discontinuous links with connections emerging from diverse and heterogeneous forms.
In Chapter 5 (“Management control artefacts: an enabling or constraining tool for action?”), Emilie Bérard questions the definition and uses of the concept of affordances from a perspective on management control. Sociomateriality research studies organizational practices by examining how the material and the social mutually and constitutively shape each other. In this perspective, the concept of affordance is of particular interest when studying the role of management tools in the transformation of an organization’s activities. Objects offer affordances for action, which depend both on its materiality and on the actors’ perception for action. However, the concept of affordances has not spread far beyond the field of information systems and technology studies, and its interpretative scope is still open to discussion for studying the role of objects in organizations. The aim of this chapter, therefore, is to examine the definition of the concept as well as its potential use and benefit in the field of management control.
Lastly, in Chapter 6 (“Sociomateriality and reputation damages, when the Omerta is broken”), Hélène Lambrix uses the story of student hazing in French universities to illustrate how material traces of an unethical behavior are used to construct and destruct corporate reputation.
11
The study focuses on multiple stakeholders’ perceptions and practices over time. Using data collected through semi-structured interviews, observation and archives on the Web, she explains the different processes used by a university and its key constituents (students and alumni) to protect and maintain the organizational reputation, and by external observers to destruct it. This chapter contributes to the recent literature on reputational crisis by providing empirical results, and exploring the relationship between reputational crisis and legitimacy costs.
Part III. Stretching out time and materiality in organizations: from presentism to longue durée
In Chapter 7 (“The historian’s present”), François Hartog highlights that conditions of the historian’s craft have changed over the last thirty years or so, and that they continue to change in front of our eyes. For Marc Bloch (1997:65), history is a “science of men in time,” that “needs to unite continuously the study of the dead with that of the living.” Today, should the historian practice his craft uniquely within the confines of the present? Hartog focuses on the extended present, that is, the new field of Memory. In order to be admitted into the public sphere, recognized by civil society, must the historian make himself “relevant” to this present, so to speak to make himself present to the present? François Hartog enters into the debates by suggesting elements of answers related to his vision of a regime of historicity.
In Chapter 8 (“Dance of sociomaterial becoming: an ontological performance”), Dick Boland’s explains how we can get behind language and explore sociomateriality not by trying to define it, but by trying to do it. It is only the performative nature of language that affords the very possibility for us to experience the world. Only where there is language there is a world. And only where the world predominates, there is history. So, because of language, man can exist – woman also – historically. Further, the tool invents the human, or the human invents himself by inventing the tool through a techno-logical exteriorization. But this exteriorization is in fact the co-constitution of the interior and the exterior through this dance, through this movement.
Dick explores palaeo-anthropology and the earliest discussion of tools, technologies and the becoming human of the homo genus to analyze the co-constituted dance of interior and exterior as a theme.
In Chapter 9, Caroline Scotto explores the Campus Paris-Saclay project in France. She questions what is included in the notion of campus by looking at the hypothesis that a historical approach can generate knowledge through the link between a context, academic and planning
12
principles, functions, actors, planning tools, spatial organizations’ and geographical situation.
Caroline Scotto proposes to focus on the principles of campus development in order to establish a morphological and functional genealogy of this object. The idea is to represent the relationship between the different models and the campus in construction by using the genealogy as a comparative tool in order to question the link between institutional changes and spatial organization.
As a conclusion, we summarize the key contributions of all authors with regards to the materialization of time (e.g. historical time) and the material dynamic of organizations. We also suggest a set of avenues for further research in the field of management and organizations studies.
13 References
Alter, N. (2001). Les logiques de l’innovation ordinaire. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Ancona, D. G., Okhuysen, G. A., & Perlow, L. A. (2001). Taking time to integrate temporal research. Academy of Management Review, 26(4), pp. 512-529.
Appadurai, A. (1986). The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective.
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Bergson, H. (2001). Time and Free Will: An Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness.
Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.
Bloch. M. (1997). Apologie pour l’histoire ou métier d’historien, Paris: Armand Colin.
Bluedorn, Allen C. & Denhardt, Robert B. (1988). Time and Organizations. Journal of Management, 14(2), pp. 299–320.
Booth, C., & Rowlinson, M. (2006). Management and organizational history: prospects.
Management & Organizational History, 1(1), pp. 5-30.
Callinicos, A. (1995). Theories and Narratives: Reflections on the Philosophy of History, Durham, NC: Duke University Press Books.
Carlile, P., Nicolini, D., Langley, A. & Tsoukas, H. (Eds.) (2013). How Matter Matters:
Objects, Artifacts, and Materiality in Organization Studies. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Carr, D. (1991). Time, Narrative, and History. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Chandler, A. (2005) Inventing the Electronic Century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Child, J. & Kieser, A. (1981). Development of organizations over time. In Handbook of Organizational Design: Adapting Organizations to their Environments, edited by P.C.
Nystrom & W.H. Starbuck, Oxford University Press, 1, pp. 28-64.
De Vaujany, FX & Vaast, E. (2013). If these walls could talk: The mutual construction of organizational space and legitimacy, Organization Science, September 2013.
Dohrn-van Rossum, G. (1997). L'histoire de l'heure: l'horlogerie et l'organisation moderne du temps. Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.
Fabian, J. (1983). Time and the Other: how Anthropology makes its Object. New York, NY:
Columbia University Press.
14
Gersick, C. J. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), pp. 9-41.
Gersick, C. J. (1989). Marking time: Predictable transitions in task groups. Academy of Management Journal, 32(2), pp. 274-309.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: introduction of the theory of structuration.
Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
Giddens, A. (1985). A Contemporary Critique of Historical Materialism: The nation-state and violence (Vol. 2). Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
Goodman, Paul S., Lawrence, Barbara S., Ancona, Deborah J. & Tushman, Michael J. (2001).
Introduction to the Special Issue: Time in Organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26 (4), pp. 507–511.
Harvey, P., Casella, E., Evans, G., Knox, H., McLean, C., Silva, E., Thoburn, N. &
Woodward, K. (Eds.) (2013). Objects and Materials: A Routledge Companion. London:
Routledge.
Hassan, R. & Purser, R. (2007). 24/7: Time and Temporality in the Network Society. Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Books.
Jones, G. & Zeitlin, J. (2009). The Oxford Handbook of Business History. Oxford, England:
Oxford University Press.
Kieser, A. (1989). Organizational, institutional, and societal evolution: Medieval craft guilds and the genesis of formal organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 540-564.
Kieser, A. (1994). Why organization theory needs historical analyses—and how this should be performed. Organization Science, 5(4), pp. 608-620.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social. An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory.
Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Le Goff, J. (1960). Au Moyen Âge: Temps de l'Église et temps du marchand. In Annales.
Histoire, Sciences Sociales, 15(3), pp. 417-433. (Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris).Le Goff, J. (2011), Interview sur le Moyen Age, Cahiers Sciences et Vie, décembre 2010-janvier 2011, p. 20.
Lee, H. & Liebenau, J. (1999). Time in Organizational Studies: Towards a New Research Direction. Organization Studies, 20(6), pp. 1035–1058.
Leonardi, P., Nardi, B. & Kallinikos, J. (Eds.) (2013). Materiality and Organizing: Social Interaction in a Technological World. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Marx, K., Engels, F., & Lenin, V. I. (1974). On historical materialism: a collection. New York, NY: International Publishers.
15
Mead, G.H. (1932, 2002). The Philosophy of the Present. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Miller, D. (2005). Materiality (Politics, History, and Culture). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Mitev, N., & de Vaujany, F. X. (2012). Seizing the opportunity: towards a historiography of information systems. Journal of Information Technology, 27(2), pp. 110-124.
Orlikowski, W.J. (2005) Material works: exploring the situated entanglement of technological performativity and human agency. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 17(1), pp.
183-186.
Orlikowski, W.J. (2007) Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies 28(9), pp. 1435–1448.
Orlikowski, W. J., & Yates, J. (2002). It's about time: Temporal structuring in organizations.
Organization Science, 13(6), pp. 684-700.
Packer, J. & Crofts, S. (Eds.) (2013). Communication Matters: Materialist Approaches to Media, Mobility and Networks. Abindgon, England: Routledge.
Pickering, A. (1995) The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Pratt, M. & Rafaeli, A. (2006). Artifacts and Organizations: Beyond Mere Symbolism.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Robichaud, D. & Cooren, F. (Eds.) (2013) Organization and Organizing: Materiality, Agency and Discourse. Abingdon, England: Routledge.
Selinger, E., Haraway, D., Ihde, I., Latour, B. and Pickering, A. (2003) Chasing Technoscience: Matrix for Materiality. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Shove, E., Trentmann, F., Wilk, R. (2009). Time, Consumption and Everyday Life: Practice, Materiality and Culture. London: Bloomsbury Academic Press.
Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and Situated Actions: the problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Tilley, C., Keane, W., Kuechler-Fogden, S., Rowlands, M. and Spyer, P. (2013). Handbook of Material Culture. London: Sage Publications.
Üsdiken, B. & Kieser, A. (2004). Introduction: History in Organization Studies, Business History, 46, pp. 321-330.
White, H. (1987). The Content and the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
